The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The main point of the grounds for appeal is that there was no misunderstanding of the fact that the victim caused the misunderstanding of the fact of the grounds for appeal, and that there was no injury to the victim due to the franchisation with the defendant.

The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined in the lower court’s judgment as to the argument that the sentencing was unfair, namely, the Defendant was also sealed by the police by “the victim’s chest by hand,” and the victim’s misunderstanding was broken down due to the misunderstanding of facts.

Then, the Roster was dismissed.

“The statement to the purport that “the victim, etc., issued a medical certificate on May 24, 2016, which issued to the victim, that “the victim, etc. was in need of two weeks’ medical treatment on the part of the part of the elbbow elbow, etc., of the instant case on the following day of the instant crime,” and on May 24, 2016, the victim, etc. issued a medical certificate to the effect that “the elbows and elbows (any arms, upper arms, and left kbows) are in need of two weeks’ treatment.” Unlike others, the victim, in light of the time, volume, degree, and degree of the injury suffered from the Defendant’s act in light of

In full view of all the facts, we affirm the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of an injury is just and there is no error of law by mistake of facts.

Therefore, the defendant's argument disputing this is without merit.

It is reasonable to respect the judgment of the first-class sentencing in the event that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first-class judgment, and the first-class sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

Since the victim suffered a disturbance in neighboring areas caused the crime of this case by interesting the victim in the process of expressing it, there are some circumstances to consider the circumstances leading to the crime of this case, and the degree of injury is not serious.

However, the court below has already considered all the above circumstances.